[Cesg-all] Results of CESG Poll closing 4 November 2019

[CCSDS Secretariat]

CESG E-Poll Identifier:  CESG-P-2019-10-005 
Approval to release CCSDS 766.3-R-1, 
Specification for RTP as Transport for Voice and 
Video over DTN (Red Book, Issue 1) for CCSDS Agency review
Results of CESG poll beginning 4 October 2019 and ending 4 November 2019:

                 Abstain:  1 (16.67%) (Calzolari)
Approve Unconditionally:  3 (50%) (Burleigh, Cola, Wilmot)
Approve with Conditions:  2 (33.33%) (Barkley, Merri)
Disapprove with Comment:  0 (0%)
CONDITIONS/COMMENTS:

     Erik Barkley (Approve with Conditions):  1) 
The Purpose and Scope and Rationale (1.2 and 1.4 
respectively) seem to be at odds with each other. 
The Purpose and Scope indicates providing a 
method for transmission of video via RTP over 
DTN. However, the Rationale section indicates "
 
Where the only common thread will be the usage of 
IP."  This reviewer is puzzled why RTP over DTN 
is being standardized if the rationale is only 
for the use of IP ­ presumably RTP over IP is 
already well-established. Please update the 
Rationale section and/or otherwise square it with 
the Purpose and Scope Section.  Perhaps it is 
envisioned that IP is the local convergence layer?

2) Suggest being consistent with nomenclature in 
the profiles box of figure 2-4 --perhaps the 
easiest "fix" is to add "H265" in front of "HEVC".
3) Pg B-2, SANA Considerations: Suggest changing 
"...will be pre-negotiated with SANA." to 
something like "...will be managed in accordiance 
with other CCSDS specifications such as DTN 
Network Management", citing the appropriate 
reference.  Rationale: 1) as written the 
paragraph is a little bit confusing as on the one 
hand it indicates no action on the part of SANA 
but also identifies "pre-negotiation" with SANA 
but does not explicitly absolve this 
recommendation from said pre-negotiation; 2) 
presumably almost all registries in SANA have 
some "authority" traced back to a CCSDS 
recommendation and it would be good for the 
reader to know what is the "authority" for DTN 
node numbers, multicast group identifiers, etc.
     Mario Merri (Approve with 
Conditions):  Figure 2-10 (pag 2-13) makes 
reference to the ION, which is a JPL 
implementation of DTN. Best to generalise to 
something like "DTN engine" and spend a few words to explain the picture.

     Jonathan Wilmot (Approve 
Unconditionally):  Will review as part of agency review.


Total Respondents:  6

No response was received from the following Area(s):

     SEA



SECRETARIAT INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS:  Approved with Conditions
PROPOSED SECRETARIAT ACTION:            Generate 
CMC poll after conditions have been addressed

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *